Jump to content

Brisketexan

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    51766
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    301

Everything posted by Brisketexan

  1. Way to call for a "final solution," asshole. There will be like 17 Americans left after that.
  2. The legal premise is that it is involuntary manslaughter to....let your 7 year old cross a street with his 10 year old sibling supervising/holding his hand. That's it. That's the legal factual scenario. That's so breathtakingly asinine and stupid, I really don't know where to start. Yeah, we Gen X types have all those stories, but FFS, we did similar with our kids. At age 7 or so, they were crossing the PCH with their 10 yr old cousins. They were taught to cross at crosswalks and use the signal. Now, might they have disregarded that and crossed in between? I don't know, I wasn't watching them do it. But Jesus, it's not criminal to let a kid cross the street. The icing on the cake? A fucking $1.5 million bond. What the fuck? Are these people a fucking flight risk? For a crime that LITERALLY doesn't even have intent as an element? This country fucking sucks.
  3. I cut her slack for a lot longer than I should have because I am a simple, lizard-brained man who is a sucker for chesty women. But goddammit, she's blown past my affinity for boobage. She's a contemptible piece of trash. Still kinda wanna see 'em, though.
  4. There is nothing -- not a single thing -- in 2025 that doesn't come back to "oh.....so it's a grift." We've made snake oil great again. Buy your spike protein detox with Trump coin crypto today! And get a special coupon for Jim Baker food survival buckets when you order!
  5. Sigh.....this promises to be a cruel summer.
  6. I have similar audio of me after red beans and rice night.
  7. Bolded etc. for emphasis. There are two options. And only two options. The argument of "but it's a waste of time to give guilty people due process" begs the question....it assumes that guilt (a term that can only be applied AFTER a procedure to determine same) applies. Applying due process to people who 99% of us know will eventually be adjudicated guilty, not entitled to asylum, what have you, is what tells us that due process is available for THE REST OF US. If you say "well, but no due process for guilty people," and then allow an extra-judicial determination of guilt to make that dividing line....then you've just ended due process. For everyone. Because I, local director of an ICE office, just decided that Chicken Sandwich is a member of Tren de Aragua, or he doesn't like jews, or he eats funny-sounding foreign foods, and therefore he has no legal status in the US. What's that, Chicken Sandwich says "wait! I'm a US citizen, let me prove it!"? Fuck that, that's just what the terrorist gang members want, to gum up our system with their bullshit defenses. Onto the plane you go, non-stop to El Salvador, terrorist! Chicken Sandwich wants it skipped. Because when we "know" someone is guilty/not entitled to asylum, we can skip all that law and rights and shit. Of course, I know that Chicken Sandwich is a secret member of Tren de Aragua. His name and ID? Those are all fake, a ruse to allow him to infiltrate our beloved country and commit his terrorist acts of depravity. I am protecting us all when I nab him, shove him in the back of a van, and have him on a flight to El Salvador to rot in prison that same day. Why should he get any chance to prove his claims of US citizenship? Why are you siding with a terrorist gang member?
  8. Yall should listen. Hornian invented the rib and narbecue.
  9. Well, I’ll cross you off the invite list to my Friday shindig at Jack the Ripper’s Grill and Games. Damned shame. They have a skee-ball setup that lets you try to roll the ball into the knife wounds of a dead prostitute for points. It’s quite popular. Saw Craig James there just last week.
  10. Water Street is solid. Don't sleep on their grilled seafood platter, it's damned good. House salad dressing is great, and you can buy a pint and bring it home.
  11. When a government official publicly states his intent to circumvent/violate the law, that does tend to establish a "case or controversy" for a court to adjudicate. A smart government official would avoid doing that.
  12. We're pretty much at "appointed his horse consul" territory: ....but the press is going to continue to sanewash this utterly insane batshittery.
  13. Made the key words big, cuz they're big and important words. "Are decided." Things "are decided" by....a legal process. Via that process, they will have the opportunity to argue if there are any exceptions, mitigating factors, etc. that should apply. Again, they will PROBABLY lose. But, the question at issue will be "decided"....via legally provided process and procedure. That's really, really important. Or, it's not. Again, just tell us if the Rule of Law applies or not, so the rest of us can know how to comport ourselves. Because if "law don't go around here," we might all want to alter our behavior.
  14. Y'all perverts! That ain't her cistern, it's her wife!
  15. Quoting because this is a dispassionate and accurate statement of the situation and the legal mechanisms in play. If you have any question about the legal mechanisms and standards in play, this is a great summary. The TLDR version? 1) His family members have a right to argue that they should be able to stay, despite the father's radicalization and crimes. 2) That argument is an uphill climb, and is likely to ultimately fail. Response to this post is correct: And again, response is correct. The Rule of Law provides that the family gets a hearing, with access to counsel. That process must be allowed to happen. People who are very likely going to ultimately lose their case have a right to due process just like people who are very likely going to ultimately win their case have that right. Because...and this is important...you can't know if a person deserves to win or lose a case until they actually have a chance to make their case. After such process, they will probably lose, and be deported. But, the Rule of Law -- which IS "process," by and large -- matters. Or, it doesn't. If it doesn't, just let the rest of us know, so we can stop acting like we're subject to it any longer. Deal?
  16. ^^^^ As if it doesn't need to be repeated.....the culture of law enforcement in this country is irreparably broken. 1) They put themselves above the public and the Constitution they actually swore to serve. 2) They live in complete and absolute fear of everything. When everything is a deadly threat at all times, you will act accordingly. 3) They all cover for each other. Not a single additional officer arriving on the scene even took a split second to offer a "WTF? The dude works here and was waiting for his ride home? WTF is wrong with you?" Nope. They back the bad cop. Always. So.... ....that translates to a simple fact: All Cops Are Bad. They either live out 1 and 2 above, or they support the shitty cops who do so via 3 above. That's it. The number of cops who don't fall on that list is so small as to not matter.
  17. I feel ya, man.
  18. If you want to figure out how to fast food, talk with a teen/young adult on a limited budget. They have absolutely figured out how to game the system. The boy comes home to visit, and he'll come to the house with a sack-o-food from Taco Bell, McD's, what have you, for under $10.
  19. Idea: Terry Crews could 100% win the presidency today. Running either as himself, or as the President Camacho character, it really wouldn't matter. He'd just have to say stuff like "Americans want a strong tough guy for president, and I'm that guy." Then flex and stuff. And then win the presidency by 5%. And by the way....I'd be THRILLED with that outcome at this point.
  20. ...yes. Because the voters won't let someone sane make it through the primary. See this: "Non-idiot" is a non-starter in elections in Louisiana, Texas, etc. You are REQUIRED to be a fucking insane moron in order to get enough votes. The math maths on this one.
  21. Oh, friendo.....the competition for that spot is SUPER stout. Hard to argue against Stalin, who managed to so badly mis-play the relationship with Germany and WWII as to get 27 million Soviet citizens killed. And that's just in the past 100 years. Dig back further, and the competition remains super stout. Ivan the Terrible screwed the pooch in the Livonian war damn near 500 years ago. The Russian experience of "worst leader ever" is kinda infinite.
  22. I'd throw in some toilets. Gotta offer something the rooskies really want and need, as a clincher.
  23. It doesn't even get the women vote. Yeah, yeah, there are a bunch of female voters on the left who love female candidates. But there are MORE female voters on the right who just can't see a woman doing a man's job, goshdurnit. Biden won women 57-42. Harris? She only won women 53-45. Hillary didn't blow 'em out of the water either - 54-39. Nobody is better at shitting on women than other women. Want to win women handily? Run a vanilla white man. Yes, that's stupid, but everything is stupid. You have to speak fluent stupid to compete in this era.
×
×
  • Create New...